现在在历史法庭上

IF 0.4 3区文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS

Journal of Historical Pragmatics Pub Date : 2018-12-31 DOI:10.1075/JHP.00020.CLA

C. Claridge

{"title":"现在在历史法庭上","authors":"C. Claridge","doi":"10.1075/JHP.00020.CLA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The investigation of the pragmatic marker now in trial proceedings from 1560 to 1800 shows a\n genre-specific usage profile with regard to its uses and functions. Courtroom “professionals” (lawyers, judges and other\n officials) use now significantly more frequently than lay speakers (witnesses, victims and defendants). The\n former use it to segment and highlight stages in the argumentation, as well as to control and to disalign with others’ interactive\n behaviour. Self-defending litigants share these functional preferences to some extent, while all other lay persons use\n now for structuring their answers and dominantly in direct-speech contexts. Now in\n professional legal speech thus functions as a strategic metapragmatic framing strategy.","PeriodicalId":54081,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Now in the historical courtroom\",\"authors\":\"C. Claridge\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/JHP.00020.CLA\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The investigation of the pragmatic marker now in trial proceedings from 1560 to 1800 shows a\\n genre-specific usage profile with regard to its uses and functions. Courtroom “professionals” (lawyers, judges and other\\n officials) use now significantly more frequently than lay speakers (witnesses, victims and defendants). The\\n former use it to segment and highlight stages in the argumentation, as well as to control and to disalign with others’ interactive\\n behaviour. Self-defending litigants share these functional preferences to some extent, while all other lay persons use\\n now for structuring their answers and dominantly in direct-speech contexts. Now in\\n professional legal speech thus functions as a strategic metapragmatic framing strategy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Historical Pragmatics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Historical Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/JHP.00020.CLA\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JHP.00020.CLA","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

摘要

从1560年到1800年，在审判过程中对语用标记的调查表明，就其用途和功能而言，语用标记具有特定的使用特征。法庭“专业人员”（律师、法官和其他官员）现在的使用频率明显高于非专业发言人（证人、受害者和被告）。前者用它来分割和突出论证中的各个阶段，以及控制和反对他人的互动行为。自我辩护的诉讼当事人在某种程度上分享了这些功能偏好，而所有其他非专业人士现在都在构建他们的答案，并且主要在直接言语环境中使用。因此，现在在专业法律演讲中，它起到了一种战略性的元语用框架策略的作用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Now in the historical courtroom

The investigation of the pragmatic marker now in trial proceedings from 1560 to 1800 shows a genre-specific usage profile with regard to its uses and functions. Courtroom “professionals” (lawyers, judges and other officials) use now significantly more frequently than lay speakers (witnesses, victims and defendants). The former use it to segment and highlight stages in the argumentation, as well as to control and to disalign with others’ interactive behaviour. Self-defending litigants share these functional preferences to some extent, while all other lay persons use now for structuring their answers and dominantly in direct-speech contexts. Now in professional legal speech thus functions as a strategic metapragmatic framing strategy.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Historical Pragmatics Multiple-

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Historical Pragmatics provides an interdisciplinary forum for theoretical, empirical and methodological work at the intersection of pragmatics and historical linguistics. The editorial focus is on socio-historical and pragmatic aspects of historical texts in their sociocultural context of communication (e.g. conversational principles, politeness strategies, or speech acts) and on diachronic pragmatics as seen in linguistic processes such as grammaticalization or discoursization. Contributions draw on data from literary or non-literary sources and from any language. In addition to contributions with a strictly pragmatic or discourse analytical perspective, it also includes contributions with a more sociolinguistic or semantic approach.